Since you all can read the original text in the given links I will abstain from citing the whole text and give Mr. Monk the chance to comment more freely on the ongoing sensations

Of course all explanations will be detailed and sufficient – but in case you should have any questions: please don't hesitate to speak your mind!

Mr. Monk - please ... do your thing ...

OK. That's where we left the site the other day.

Here we see again why this - between XX and XXI - is the ONLY correct place for Le MAT.

He could be called a "Dragon Rider" for that - and so far no Hebrew connotations were needed for him to claim his location.

BUT some may have known about this plan in an allegorical sense because they drew the connection to shin - what is totally bogus of course and an over all rationalization of a subject that was otherwise mysterious to them.

By linking Le MAT to SOMETHING they THOUGHT they had an understanding of they tried to incorporate Le MAT into a metaphysical system that would be abused to no end ...

Adrian made a nice serpent (not really) -head-prop for us to get easier in the mood of the people in the 18th century when THEY were watching THIS. You must be clear about their impressionability which was by magnitude greater compared to our's today.

NO movies. NO i-phones. NO entertainment at all – especially in the rural country sides - in any meaning we would apply to this term today.

STORIES told in an educating and entertaining way were ALL they had back then.
So consider what you will see (and saw here so far) as a picture book – like for little children.
Made from Tarot cards in a PRE-revolutionary time and place (FRANCE) to teach un-educated people about the world – AND The WORLD to COME.

While connecting this story to old tales of wisdom (Pythagoras > the TIMAEUS > Alchemy and other secretive teachings) the OUROBOROS appeared ON the table BEFORE their HUNGRY eyes – and NOW it begins to MOVE ...

Now that's how the cards look like ON the TABLE.

In "C"'s original text (links above) you would see that he speaks about a connection between II and XX rooted in metaphysical ground - we could dig deeper into that when YOU should wish to.

So for now I'll just go with the "wake-up-call" that comes from the HEAVENLY trumpet delivered to La PAPESSE right into her ears when Le JUGEMENT APPEARED right BESIDE her.

TA-HA!

Paul Marteau made sure that the connection between the golden CROSS on the trumpet's ancient (XX) and the CROSSWISE golden bands on the chest of La PAPESSA could be recognized by COLOR.

The BOOK (The SCRIPTURE!) in her lap has 8 lines on the LEFT page and 8 on the right page - which is consistent with the ancient Geomantic model of 16 (8 pairs) Adrian referred to all along before in the Tarotée topic here.

1-PIERRE MADENIÉ-1709-France
… did the same AND added 3 +++. 2 ++ to her BOOKMARK (later referred to as such by „C“ in his genuine comments) and 1 + to the band that goes from her right shoulder down to the left hip.
The BOOK (The SCRIPTURE!) in her lap has 9 lines on the (her) RIGHT page and 8 on the LEFT page.
The XX holds an abstract triangular structure that does NOT belong to the naturalistic depiction of the rectangular „grave“ - at the left side of it.
You will see that exact same abstract triangular structure on most of the other decks from our vault here that do NOT hold the complete set of correct signifiers.

2-FRANCOIS HÉRI-1718-Switzerland
No correlation concerning colors between the crosses on II and XX – BUT he also did add those 3 +++ in the same manner as PIERRE MADENIÉ did.
Her (II) SCRIPTURE shows 8 lines on BOTH pages.
The XX holds an abstract triangular structure that does NOT belong to the naturalistic depiction of the rectangular „grave“ at the left side of it.

3-FRANCOIS CHOSSON-1736-France
No correlation concerning colors between the crosses on II and XX – BUT he also did add those 3 +++ in the same manner as PIERRE MADENIÉ and FRANCOIS HÉRI.
Her (II) SCRIPTURE shows 8 lines on BOTH pages.
The XX holds an abstract triangular structure that does NOT belong to the naturalistic depiction of the rectangular „grave“ at the left side of it.

4-JEAN-BAPTISTE MADENIÉ-1739-France
Same colors for both crosses on II and XX.
3 additional +++ for her (II) chest bands.
9 lines on the RIGHT page and 8 lines on the LEFT page.
The same abstract triangular structure on the XX.

5-FRANÇOIS TOURCATY-1745-France
Same colors for both crosses on II and XX.
3 additional +++ for her (II) chest bands.
8 lines on the RIGHT page and 7 lines on the LEFT page.
The same abstract triangular structure on the XX.

6-SAID « ARNOULT » -1748-France
Since this deck has been „vandalized“ (site comment) in a colorful way no exact observations can be documented concerning the colors.

It seems to be sure though that her (II) „cross“ was meant to be „pale“ whereas the ancient of the heavenly trumpet shows a golden cross (that was adopted by Paul Marteau).
NO additional +++ for her (II) chest band – BUT a very little un-suspicious drop-like spot on the chest band that runs from her right shoulder to her left hip (in a similar location the 3rd + on the other decks which depicted them was placed).
Paul Marteau copied this drop-like spot VERY carefully.

This drop-like spot holds a connection to the (so-to-say) DOS of the Tarot de Marseille type II (if we were talking PC-speak here).
You should really think about the Tarot de Marseille (Type II especially) in terms of an Antikythera mechanism like device for education and self evolvement – but we will get to that in due time ...

8 lines on BOTH pages.
NO abstract triangular structure on the XX.

7-ROCHUS SCHÄR-1750-Switzerland
DIFFERENT colors for both crosses on II and XX.
3 additional +++ for her (II) chest bands. BUT in a manner that depicts the little crosses as if they were manufactured from triangles.
9 lines on the RIGHT page and 8 lines on the LEFT page.
A similar abstract triangular structure on the XX.

8-CLAUDE BURDEL-1751-Switzerland
DIFFERENT colors for both crosses on II and XX.
1 additional + below her (II) nearly invisible chest bands in a different manner that depicts the little cross as if it were manufactured from 2 triangles and a stick.
9 lines on the RIGHT page and 8 lines on the LEFT page.
A similar abstract triangular structure on the XX.

9-NICOLAS CONVER (?) -1760-France
On a side note: I proved before that NICOLAS CONVER can NOT be the author of this deck because he was not BORN when it was made!
You can check the Museum in France for that which holds his deck and has documented his life-data.
Furthermore: the abbreviation NasCONVER on the 2 of coins is not supposed to be an abbreviation for NICOLAS CONVER (And it is quite a STRETCH to make it that! WHO would abbreviate NICOLAS to Nas?).
AND who would print an acronym for a NON-existing person on that card anyway?

Concerning the purpose of the Tarot cards as an instrument for education it is very likely that it is an abbreviated LATIN (alchemical) term.
CONVER for conversio (conversion) and Nas for nascendi (nascent) – exactly what the 2 coins stand for: the CONVERSION from one currency into another representing the same value but still in an hypothetical state of BECOMING (real) – and so the POSSIBILITY to be BORN ANEW is propagated here on the 2 of coins in this special deck.

Same color for both crosses on II and XX.
1 additional + for her (II) chest band. Only the band that runs from her right shoulder to her left hip is adorned.
8 lines on the RIGHT page and 9 (?) lines on her LEFT page.
NO abstract triangular structure on the XX.

10-JACQUES ROCHIAS-1782-Switzerland
DIFFERENT colors for both crosses on II and XX.
PLAIN chest bands for the II.
8 lines on BOTH pages.
NO abstract triangular structure on the XX.

11-ARNOUX & AMPHOUX-1793-France
DIFFERENT colors for both crosses on II and XX.
3 additional +++ for her (II) chest bands in the same manner we observed before.
8 lines on the RIGHT page and 7 lines on the LEFT page.
An abstract triangular structure on the XX.

12-BERNARDIN SUZANNE-1839-France
DIFFERENT colors for both crosses on II and XX.
3 additional +++ for her (II) chest bands. BUT in a manner that depicts the little crosses as if the were manufactured from triangles.
6(7?) lines on BOTH pages.
An abstract triangular structure on the XX.

Of course you would have to click and observe for yourself because unfortunately we did not stumble upon a possibility to link directly to a sole card on that great site – but we are all grown ups here who are used to look and to THINK for ourselves – right?

Like it was mentioned before: ONLY the said « ARNOULT » -1748 – France has the “papal crown” depicted in THIS manner > GROWING above and beyond the card's FRAME.

All other IIs wear a similar crown BUT no crown trespasses the border of the card's frame.
This is the card that Paul Marteau copied – and NOT the CONVERish one!

This peculiarity holds the MOST important advice for the “player” at this moment because it means that the II has the ability to GROW and get BIGGER!

When before here (to help your eyes) other cards like The MOON or The WORLD for example were projected on the background of the layout – it could have also be done by imagining it only.

HERE it would have been best to DRAW it actually when you were at this point of the layout and had no-one to teach you to go further.
Like Adrian explained several times in the Tarotée thread:
Since antiquity (and actually the first documents confirming that - are from ancient Egypt) it was comon for artists to draw true to scale from small to BIG with a net-like device.
Further links are in the same Tarotée thread.

The simple and well pronounced lines on a printed card are perfect for this purpose.
But naturally it would take time to do so!
Fortunately with the technological improvement especially in THIS area NOW this tedious groundwork can be presented here within a very short timespan.

Now it is about the SCRIPTURE in her lap!

For that we should 1st consider HER ROLE in this drama (The OUROBOROS) so far that was told with the cards up until to this moment.

Like in the ancient EURYNOME creation myth The GODDESS (depicted on The WORLD card) gave birth to the whole creation (that is symbolized by The OUROBOROS).
Le BATELEUR was the first visible spark in the emptiness on the table – followed by La PAPESSA who was/is from an official/clerical POV a heretic of the highest order and even with the reformation on the rise since at least Martin Luther (1517 – 1648) ...

a woman as a clerical leader was a NO-NO. La PAPESSA instead claims superiority with her whole attire – and a superiority that comes with the traditional regalia of the older CATHOLIC church.

Considering HER background connection to much older myths than the Christian bible has to offer and different cultural lore (ancient Greece and middle east) it should NOT be the bible in her lap and with alchemy and Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry as supporters for a NEW RE-organized world (AKA revolution) of education for all people we should consider for example GEOMETRY as a subject of HER SCRIPTURE.

A SCRIPTURE that can be (like The SCARF on The WORLD) found mimicked by the Tarot cards we see here at this moment on the table.

(Adrian's illustration here differs ONE card from the scribd text by “C” - who included XI in that mimicry – because Adrian couldn't find a purpose for that inclusion. From Adrian's perspective at this point of the story it couldn't be for the semantic content of the cards who impersonate The BOOK and never again those cards would be found together in a meaningful manner during the ongoing layout. So the cards were reddened here only to give you a more symmetrical impression of The BOOK.)

Now GEOMETRY kicks in (mildly at 1st ... ).

“C” speaks about this as The BOOKMARK - and did only mention that as the minor option for understanding La PAPESSA without giving illustrations for that geometrical process – so Adrian here made them exclusively for YOU

The real GEOMETRY lesson starts though when you DO realize that The BOOKMARK really consists of 2 PARALLEL LINES.

Thank you Mr. Monk. That was incredible.
See you next time with more exiting stuff.

I'm on my own today because Mr. Monk took a leave of absence so that he could help a friend to find closure on some pressing matter.

So you see that the 2 parallel lines (A 1 + 2) hit very specific areas of geometrical interest when it comes to define the so far - and up to this point in time in the “game” - achieved card pattern.

A 1 hits PRECISELY the top right corner spot (B 1) of the now MOVED card II.

A 1 hits PRECISELY the spot EXACTLY between XVII + XVIII (D 1).

This means that the person(s) who made the PLAN for this whole setup:
(the concerned) cards – lines on II – the layout and its exact dimensions were known and predicted in that plan.
The proportional dimensions of every card were known because otherwise it would not be possible to hit the exact spot BETWEEN XVII + XVIII.

A 2 now (the bottom line of the huge BOOKMARK) goes through and sculpts the LITTLE BOOKMARK on the MOVED II (C 2).

This all is obviously no little achievement – like you will see in an instant below with FRANÇOIS HÉRI's 1718 Tarot de Marseille deck from Switzerland:

For your orientation I recreated the whole Paul Marteau scene with FRANÇOIS HÉRI's cards with all my additions.

You see that NO rendezvous point was met – not even closely in comparison to Paul Marteau's precision.

It is very interesting though that FH did use the exact same angle for the BOOKMARK even when it had NO use for his deck. When you download both JPGs you can do an overlay to confirm this statement.

His Tarot de Marseille is from 1718.
His card frames are without any precision concerning the top + bottom boxes.
Even the frames from card to card differ a lot.

It seems that he did this deck “flying blind” so to say.
As if he had been told a story and was shown something – without developing an integrated concept of the tale.
The ANGLE of the BOOKMARK is proof for that.
Or maybe his wise friend died in the process of teaching.

This kind of “allegorical knowledge” will occur time and time again in the following posts and that type of “knowledge” that does not know about the FACTS is the root for the modern degradation of Tarot cards – beginning with OSWALT WIRTH and his “teacher” STANISLAS de GUAITA ...

Because FH's cards have a different (colorful) quality I'll show you another perspective for observation. Do not be afraid to scale the JPGs up to 300% to observe in full detail.
THEY can stand it!

Here is FH's OUROBOROS – which was quite possible to achieve up until this point because even when the finer geometry was not part of HIS game – you could still get the rough direction for the II's MOVE from The BOOKMARK – BUT everything I will prove to you later would not have been possible with FH's 1718 Tarot de Marseille.

Here I give you an overlay for direct comparison. Paul Marteau's OUROBOROS (reduced to sepia in the foreground) is less wide – like you see here ...

... and here.

Of course this begs the question how both layouts were achieved for your direct comparison.
In the background you see the FH OUROBOROS and his II directly after download and in her original dimensions when she was placed in the Photoshop CC PSD file.

It would have been no use to try to give her the direct and correct metric dimensions in comparison to the Paul Marteau II on the left – NO direct comparison between both cards (and decks) would have been possible ...

... instead I gave FH's II the exact same HEIGHT as PM's II and (PS CC does that with automated precision) the WIDTH changed accordingly!

Et voilà ...

Now you see here that the FH cards are a teeny tiny bit wider than the PM cards – what adds up to the wider profile of the (his) OUROBOROS – what leads to the LOSS of ALL rendezvous points.

So (not really ) in theory there should (have been) a Master-PLAN out there that was later revived within the SAID « ARNOULT » 1748 in France ...

Since Mr. Monk is still on his leave of absence to aid his trusted friend and hasn't returned yet I will for now continue on my own ...

… back to Paul Marteau's OUROBOROS now and his PRECISE BOOKMARK ...

… but we will have to get rid of all the OTHER CARDS to SEE better what the 2 IIs have in STORE for us!

Like The BOOKMARK before The BENCH here holds amazing information ...

… and just like before we should perceive The BENCH as PARALLEL LINES. 4 of THEM.

The upper 2 lines – E 1 + 2 – are grouped – just like you see.

E 2 runs through the little MOVED II in the rendezvous point F 2.
So the LITTLE II is – so to say – sitting on the SAME BENCH as her HUGE TWIN.
Or you could could say that the little II is sitting in „her lap“ - casually speaking of course

The 2nd - top - line is a totally different animal so to say.

E 1 runs through the little MOVED II in the specific rendezvous point G 1 that deserves your utmost ATTENTION – to say the LEAST!

Because: NOW those 2 versions (the little MOVED II and the HUGE II) of Paul Marteau's II begin to COMMUNICATE with each-other by GEOMETRICAL means!

G 1 – which exists only due to the mercy of the HUGE II's upper BENCH line and becomes (of course) MIRRORED in the HUGE apparition: G x ...

… and a similar occurrence happens with the renewed assistance of The BOOKMARK's UPPER line: A 1.
A 1 strikes the small II in the rendezvous point H 1 ...

… which gets ALSO MIRRORED within the center of H x ...

… which is a VERY important location ...

... just similar to G x.

Now we can do away with the markers and focus on the whole MEANs of appearance for the PATTERN … only the FILLER is needed HERE ...

… to produce some adequate closure for the card-full pattern on HER playground.

2 PILLARS are build from 5 cards each – restricted from growing above and beyond by the HUGE II's frame – and the downward BORDER that SHE brought herself.

Some „educated“ „scholars“ and „experts“ of the cards did perceive them – of course – driven by PREJUDICE – as BOAS & JACHIN – without EVER being allowed to lay an eye on the GLORY.

Paul Marteau (and the SAID « ARNOULT » 1748 before … ) TRIED to give YOU an eye-FULL of wisdom – but who cared?